Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by NJSquirrel

  1. The MapBox Outdoor maps were exceptionally good - and I was rather disappointed when they disappeared over the weekend. The maps were so easy to read, visually, and the detail in mountain areas were even more helpful than the ever wonderful open Cycle Maps.


    Please bring them back! :huh:


    And thanks for all the wonderful developments of late! B)




    MapBox is exceptional. Please bring it back!

  2. I think folks are focusing too much on the DNF angle of the situation and not enough on how simply the situation can be mitigated by the Cache Owner responding to a Reviewer's action with a simple note to the effect of "thanks for your note, I'm on it!" Even if the Cache Owner misses the first electronic nudge and a cache gets archived, the Cache Owner can ask for unarchival simply by contacting the Reviewer. In the disablement examples given, there is nothing stopping the Cache Owner from Re-enabling the cache.


    Folks seem to looking for absolutes when there are none. Every Reviewer Note/Reviewer Disable/Reviewer Archival has its own unique circumstances behind it.


    It's not as simple as that. Posting a reply only puts off another reviewer note in another 30 days. Eventually someone has to go out and check on it. If it's a 5 mile hike up steep terrain, or requiring a boat or climbing gear, is it really necessary after just 1 DNF?

    ...or you can just re-enable the cache. I know one CO in our area who does this without even checking on the placement.


    It goes back to the poor CO maintenance issue. If we want viable caches, we need COs that actually care.

  3. I personally think we can't treat remote/difficult caches any different than a lamp-post hide, when it comes to owner responsibilities. Just because it is a remote/difficult hide, doesn't mean the owner gets a pass on the upkeep.


    Translation: you want to encourage lamp-post hides and discourage remote/difficult hides.


    Well, seems to me you are getting your way.


    Nope...Translation: Place a Cache, Take Care of it. Nothing more, nothing less.

    Couldn't agree more!

  4. It's a shame that at the end of some conversations I had at this recent event, folks were discouraging DNF logs. I regularly post my DNFs and feel that it's pertinent to my caching history. I also regularly post needs maintenance and needs archive logs as I feel necessary. I don't think that anybody should be discouraged from doing so. I especially feel that cachers shouldn't feel discouraged about posting DNFs in fear that a difficult cache may be disabled and ultimately archived. Unfortunately, that's the general consensus among our community as of late.


    I encourage OReviewer to continue doing the work that he's doing as I have seen him clean up some abandoned listings that really needed to be archived. On another note, I also encourage him to use better judgement at times based on the difficulty, terrain, log history and remote locations of some of these hides that are not oft found.

    I post my DNFs as well. What is discouraging about our area though (not sure how it is in other regions) is that MANY geocachers don't post DNFs. However, when a cache goes unfound you start to see the "watch" list swell in number. I've seen so many lonely caches with upwards of 8-10 watchers. Those I can almost guarantee a DNF. Not too surprisingly though, the lonely caches without many watchers I'm able to find. Notice the pattern?


    It is unfortunate that some quality caches have been disabled and eventually archived. But I think the lack of maintenance in our general area has caused some of these caches to get lost in the shuffle of all the other unmaintained/abandoned caches. Frankly, I think the reviewer is becoming overwhelmed.


    Keep posting your DNF folks and maintain your caches COs! Problem solved.

  5. I'm from the area in question and I have to say that the reviewer is doing a good job. I have seen far too many COs ignore NM posts to the point of totally ignoring the cache. It seems that many of the COs in the area EXPECT others to maintain and replace their hides when they get into trouble. Replace a soaked log? Not the COs problem! Cracked lid? The next finder can hang a bison tube anywhere he/she likes. TD my hide? I don't care..I can't be bothered to respond to the reviewer and I have 500 caches to find before I can get out that way to fix it. Its gotten to the point where missing caches trigger throwdowns so searchers can claim smilies, rather than posting DNFs that will simply get ignored. The prevailing culture in the area is to claim a smilie at all costs and be damned the geocaching guidelines. This is in stark contrast to SE PA where I work and also cache. For the most part, COs in SE PA maintain their hides and I rarely/if ever see the reviewer (who happens to be the same reviewer for the area in question) TD a hide.


    NJ state parks have adopted a new policy with some pretty strict guidelines requiring routine maintenance of caches, and I for one like that aspect of the policy. It may ruin the "lonely cache" aspect of the game, but at least we'll have a pretty good idea whether a hide is worry of a visit.


    If more COs in the area would maintain their hides, I think the reviewer would be less apt to tap the TD button and the community as a whole would be more apt to adhere to the geocaching guidelines.


    This isn't a reviewer problem, it is a CO problem!


    P.S. 4wheelin_fool is one of the few COs in the area who maintains ALL his hides. It would be a pleasure if more COs would follow his example!

  6. The return of locationless caches so we can go around town photographing yellow jeeps and flagpoles again to get credit for a cache.


    Nah, seriously, my pet peeve, update the benchmarking database.

    I'm not sure that is something GS can do, but heck it is always worth asking.

    I'd like to see this too. I've noticed other sites have a more current DB of newer benchmarks. GC could at least update the database on a yearly basic through cooperation with NGS or whoever manages the benchmark database.

  7. You can try something like this now:


    <div class='stat' style='position:relative; top:-195px; left:66px; height:0px;'>

    <img style="vertical-align:sub" src='/images/icons/32/dnf.png' alt='' height="16" width="16" />

    64 Dnf Logs


    <div class='stat' style='position:relative; top:-195px; left:104px; height:0px;'>

    <img style="vertical-align:sub; margin-left:5px" src='/images/wpttypes/2.gif' alt='' height="16" width="16" />

    46 Caches Hidden


    Of course the moment I reply, my prayers are answered. Thanks fbingha!



  8. I am nearing getting a new phone as well. I currently have the iPhone 4s and have had a fine time using that solely. However, I have nothing to compare it to. I like many of the functions (aside from GPS/caching related) that my coworkers show me with the Galaxy. However, reading all these iPhone/Galaxy threads makes it so hard to decide. Some swear their iPhone has performed better than Galaxy when out caching with friends using the Galaxy, while others say the opposite. I guess you just don't know until you try it, but I am worried about swapping solely due to fear that I will regret not having as good of results with caching using a Galaxy. All other cell phone tasks I think I'd be fine with. Wish I just knew definitively that Galaxy would be fine for caching without having to make the swap first then possibly regret it. I'm open to hearing any opinions!

    I recently switched from an iPhone4s to a Galaxy S5. The difference was night and day. The i4 has a peak accuracy of 16ft while the S5 is 9ft. Still not as good as a GPSer, but you get all the benefits of having a phone.


    The screen is a lot bigger too, so its not as hard to read in the daylight.


    Also, I flipped my 'yak one day while trying to get over a log. I forgot my S5 was in my shorts' pocket for over 10 minutes while I emptied the water out of my 'yak. Still works like a charm to this day! Try that with a i4 :o

  9. people not maintaining there caches...i recently did a multi in a cemetery and we spend almost an hour looking for the final cache. then i looked at the post again online and nobody had logged it for over 2 years. as a CO, you shouldn't place caches if you can't keep up on them.


    I agree. Especially if the cache has been getting regular visits, then suddenly nothing for months. It's worth checking even if there are no DNFs. It's one thing if the cache is on top of a mountain where it requires a half day hike to get to and only gets one or two finds a year. But a cemetery? They are usually easily accessible. It shouldn't be too hard for the CO to go visit the cache once a year just to be sure it's still in good shape.


    Why wouldn't we expect the seekers of the caches to log their DNF to give the CO a heads-up that something might be amiss? Why do you expect the COs to closely monitor all their hides to detect a missing cache? That is what DNFs are for!


    There is no shame in DNFs. Post them!

  10. I'm having a similar issue. When I chose the *.gws from my phone it says the file is invalid. The code that I received when I finished the cartridge is no longer there in the saved cartridge(At the time I completed the cartridge I didn't have a piece of paper to write it down). I know the cartridge is saved because the cartridge still indicates that I completed the Wherigo. Any help would be appreciated. I'm using WhereYouGo on an android S5.



  11. I would log a DNF if I got to GZ and actually started searching.

    If for some reason I didn't make it to GZ but got close enough to start a search but was prevented, say, by roadworks or construction in the vicinity or being unprepared for the terrain, or had a nose bleed, I would write a note.



    I've also placed notes where I could see the container, but couldn't reach it because I didn't have the proper equipment to retrieve it. Some people would log a find and think that's ok...NOT

  12. People who never log a DNF.


    I recently saw a cache page where someone had a found log saying "This is the fifth time I've come here looking for the cache, and I finally found it!"


    I looked through the cache logs, and they didn't log a DNF for any of their previous attempts. I feel logging a DNF is a courtesy to other cachers and COs.


    This reminds me of something else that irks me. Overzealous Reviewers who disable caches when 2 or 3 DNF are posted. I can understand if it's a lamppost hide that's been found 58 times in a row, but I've seen it done to caches that have 5/5 D/T and find rates around 70%. I know the Reviewers have a lot of things to joggle, but they need to take pause before hitting the TD button.


    This is a contributing factor which causes cachers to NOT post DNFs.

  13. Many people will look at a satellite view of the area to find the easiest approach, but with a multi you can put the first stage right at the trailhead which will lead them to the final.


    Keep in mind that most people aren't opposed to using a trail, but they will avoid bushwhacking if they don't know a trail exists.

  14. If I find a name in the physical logbook but they haven't logged the find online, you better believe I go and erase their name from the logbook! :mad:



    Its interesting that you say this. I did a cache not more than 2 weeks ago and found a name in the physical log that wasn't online. It was a person's full name and one I didn't recognize as a geocacher. I can only assume a hiker trekked by and stumpled upon the container and logged in. I thought it was kinda cool that the muggle did this and wondered if they ever inquired about geocaching. I have my doubts though, since the container was a micro and no geocaching note was inside.


    The ony reason I noticed the name was that this was a cache that hadn't been found in over 6 months and qualified for a challenge, but this muggle hiker spoiled it and found it only a week before I happened upon it <_<

  15. Throwing down is generally quite accepted in the Geocaching mainstream. The forums ain't the Geocaching mainstream though. But rest assured, The Frog and it's volunteer reviewers are all vehemently anti-throwdown.

    I don't think its so much being anti-throwdown as it is a commitment to the idea that the physical cache is the property of the cache owner. When people start replacing containers without permission you run into the issue of who owns the new container. If there is a problem, can the cache owner just say that the container isn't theirs?


    Funny thing is that on the forum is that many people who would say it's okay to replace a broken or leaky container with a new one are appalled when someone leaves a throwdown for a cache that is presumably missing. In either case, you've created a issue as to who owns the container.


    You couldn't be more wrong about your assumptions. We hate throwdowns because of the following:


    1. It's a lame attempt at a smilie

    2. It can/will cause confusion when more than one container will be at the physical location. I have seen numerous cases of this in my general area.


    Replacing an obviously damaged geocache is not the same thing. You FOUND the original, so you can log a smilie without feeling cheated and you know that the replacement is the only one that will remain.


    3. It results in lame/unmaintained caches


    Replacing the container can breathe life back into a cache that has seen better days, but as some would say, it is performing maintenance on a cache that has been abandoned. That's a good debate to have, but I for one am ok with maintaining a cache if I choose to.


    EDIT: And by replacement cache I mean like-for-like or better. If an ammo can is damaged and you put a film pot in its place, that's not a replacement, that's an insult!

  16. I have no problem with " replacement caches " but I am in a small minority ( of 1 ? :) )

    As you say it should be a fun game and I'd rather see two caches at GZ than none. I don't care if a CO hasn't logged on in 50 years...a replacement may stay in play and be found by dozens of cachers over a period of years instead of nothing there for anybody to find. I think only 1-1 1/2 diff. with good hints should be replaced so you can be 99% sure they're gone.....also a replacement should be a good water tight container.

    I have no issue with replacing a bad container with a good one. But placing a new container when you can't find the original is not a replacement, it a lame grab for a :)

    • Upvote 1
  • Create New...